What would be a more idiomatic way to partition a seq based on a seq of integers instead of just one integer?
Here's my implementation:
(defn partition-by-seq
"Return a lazy sequence of lists with a variable number of items each
determined by the n in ncoll. Extra values in coll are dropped."
[ncoll coll]
(let [partition-coll (mapcat #(repeat % %) ncoll)]
(->> coll
(map vector partition-coll)
(partition-by first)
(map (partial map last)))))
Then (partition-by-seq [2 3 6] (range)) yields ((0 1) (2 3 4) (5 6 7 8 9 10)).
Your implementation looks fine, but there could be a more simple solution which uses simple recursion wrapped in lazy-seq(and turns out to be more efficient) than using map and existing partition-by as in your case.
(defn partition-by-seq [ncoll coll]
(if (empty? ncoll)
'()
(let [n (first ncoll)]
(cons (take n coll)
(lazy-seq (partition-by-seq (rest ncoll) (drop n coll)))))))
A variation on Ankur's answer, with a minor addition of laziness and when-let instead of an explicit test for empty?.
(defn partition-by-seq [parts coll]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [s (seq parts)]
(cons
(take (first s) coll)
(partition-by-seq (rest s) (nthrest coll (first s)))))))
(first (reduce (fn [[r l] n]
[(conj r (take n l)) (drop n l)])
[[] (range)]
[2 3 6]))
=> [(0 1) (2 3 4) (5 6 7 8 9 10)]
Related
I have sequence in clojure of theem
(1 2 3 4)
how can I get all the tails of sequence like
((1 2 3 4) (2 3 4) (3 4) (4) ())
Another way to get all tails is by using the reductions function.
user=> (def x '(1 2 3 4))
#'user/x
user=> (reductions (fn [s _] (rest s)) x x)
((1 2 3 4) (2 3 4) (3 4) (4) ())
user=>
If you want to do this with higher-level functions, I think iterate would work well here:
(defn tails [xs]
(concat (take-while seq (iterate rest xs)) '(()))
However, I think in this case it would be cleaner to just write it with lazy-seq:
(defn tails [xs]
(if-not (seq xs) '(())
(cons xs (lazy-seq (tails (rest xs))))))
Here is one way.
user=> (def x [1 2 3 4])
#'user/x
user=> (map #(drop % x) (range (inc (count x))))
((1 2 3 4) (2 3 4) (3 4) (4) ())
One way you can do that is by
(defn tails [coll]
(take (inc (count coll)) (iterate rest coll)))
(defn tails
[s]
(cons s (if-some [r (next s)]
(lazy-seq (tails r))
'(()))))
Yippee! Another one:
(defn tails [coll]
(if-let [s (seq coll)]
(cons coll (lazy-seq (tails (rest coll))))
'(())))
This is really just what reductions does under the hood. The best answer, by the way, is ez121sl's.
Is there a function that could replace subsequences? For example:
user> (good-fnc [1 2 3 4 5] [1 2] [3 4 5])
;; => [3 4 5 3 4 5]
I know that there is clojure.string/replace for strings:
user> (clojure.string/replace "fat cat caught a rat" "a" "AA")
;; => "fAAt cAAt cAAught AA rAAt"
Is there something similar for vectors and lists?
Does this work for you?
(defn good-fnc [s sub r]
(loop [acc []
s s]
(cond
(empty? s) (seq acc)
(= (take (count sub) s) sub) (recur (apply conj acc r)
(drop (count sub) s))
:else (recur (conj acc (first s)) (rest s)))))
Here is a version that plays nicely with lazy seq inputs. Note that it can take an infinite lazy sequence (range) without looping infinitely as a loop based version would.
(defn sq-replace
[match replacement sq]
(let [matching (count match)]
((fn replace-in-sequence [[elt & elts :as sq]]
(lazy-seq
(cond (empty? sq)
()
(= match (take matching sq))
(concat replacement (replace-in-sequence (drop matching sq)))
:default
(cons elt (replace-in-sequence elts)))))
sq)))
#'user/sq-replace
user> (take 10 (sq-replace [3 4 5] ["hello, world"] (range)))
(0 1 2 "hello, world" 6 7 8 9 10 11)
I took the liberty of making the sequence argument the final argument, since this is the convention in Clojure for functions that walk a sequence.
My previous (now deleted) answer was incorrect because this was not as trivial as I first thought, here is my second attempt:
(defn seq-replace
[coll sub rep]
(letfn [(seq-replace' [coll]
(when-let [s (seq coll)]
(let [start (take (count sub) s)
end (drop (count sub) s)]
(if (= start sub)
(lazy-cat rep (seq-replace' end))
(cons (first s) (lazy-seq (seq-replace' (rest s))))))))]
(seq-replace' coll)))
I would like to "chunk" a seq into subseqs the same as partition-by, except that the function is not applied to each individual element, but to a range of elements.
So, for example:
(gather (fn [a b] (> (- b a) 2))
[1 4 5 8 9 10 15 20 21])
would result in:
[[1] [4 5] [8 9 10] [15] [20 21]]
Likewise:
(defn f [a b] (> (- b a) 2))
(gather f [1 2 3 4]) ;; => [[1 2 3] [4]]
(gather f [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9]) ;; => [[1 2 3] [4 5 6] [7 8 9]]
The idea is that I apply the start of the list and the next element to the function, and if the function returns true we partition the current head of the list up to that point into a new partition.
I've written this:
(defn gather
[pred? lst]
(loop [acc [] cur [] l lst]
(let [a (first cur)
b (first l)
nxt (conj cur b)
rst (rest l)]
(cond
(empty? l) (conj acc cur)
(empty? cur) (recur acc nxt rst)
((complement pred?) a b) (recur acc nxt rst)
:else (recur (conj acc cur) [b] rst)))))
and it works, but I know there's a simpler way. My question is:
Is there a built in function to do this where this function would be unnecessary? If not, is there a more idiomatic (or simpler) solution that I have overlooked? Something combining reduce and take-while?
Thanks.
Original interpretation of question
We (all) seemed to have misinterpreted your question as wanting to start a new partition whenever the predicate held for consecutive elements.
Yet another, lazy, built on partition-by
(defn partition-between [pred? coll]
(let [switch (reductions not= true (map pred? coll (rest coll)))]
(map (partial map first) (partition-by second (map list coll switch)))))
(partition-between (fn [a b] (> (- b a) 2)) [1 4 5 8 9 10 15 20 21])
;=> ((1) (4 5) (8 9 10) (15) (20 21))
Actual Question
The actual question asks us to start a new partition whenever pred? holds for the beginning of the current partition and the current element. For this we can just rip off partition-by with a few tweaks to its source.
(defn gather [pred? coll]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [s (seq coll)]
(let [fst (first s)
run (cons fst (take-while #((complement pred?) fst %) (next s)))]
(cons run (gather pred? (seq (drop (count run) s))))))))
(gather (fn [a b] (> (- b a) 2)) [1 4 5 8 9 10 15 20 21])
;=> ((1) (4 5) (8 9 10) (15) (20 21))
(gather (fn [a b] (> (- b a) 2)) [1 2 3 4])
;=> ((1 2 3) (4))
(gather (fn [a b] (> (- b a) 2)) [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9])
;=> ((1 2 3) (4 5 6) (7 8 9))
Since you need to have the information from previous or next elements than the one you are currently deciding on, a partition of pairs with a reduce could do the trick in this case.
This is what I came up with after some iterations:
(defn gather [pred s]
(->> (partition 2 1 (repeat nil) s) ; partition the sequence and if necessary
; fill the last partition with nils
(reduce (fn [acc [x :as s]]
(let [n (dec (count acc))
acc (update-in acc [n] conj x)]
(if (apply pred s)
(conj acc [])
acc)))
[[]])))
(gather (fn [a b] (when (and a b) (> (- b a) 2)))
[1 4 5 8 9 10 15 20 21])
;= [[1] [4 5] [8 9 10] [15] [20 21]]
The basic idea is to make partitions of the number of elements the predicate function takes, filling the last partition with nils if necessary. The function then reduces each partition by determining if the predicate is met, if so then the first element in the partition is added to the current group and a new group is created. Since the last partition could have been filled with nulls, the predicate has to be modified.
Tow possible improvements to this function would be to let the user:
Define the value to fill the last partition, so the reducing function could check if any of the elements in the partition is this value.
Specify the arity of the predicate, thus allowing to determine the grouping taking into account the current and the next n elements.
I wrote this some time ago in useful:
(defn partition-between [split? coll]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [[x & more] (seq coll)]
(lazy-loop [items [x], coll more]
(if-let [[x & more] (seq coll)]
(if (split? [(peek items) x])
(cons items (lazy-recur [x] more))
(lazy-recur (conj items x) more))
[items])))))
It uses lazy-loop, which is just a way to write lazy-seq expressions that look like loop/recur, but I hope it's fairly clear.
I linked to a historical version of the function, because later I realized there's a more general function that you can use to implement partition-between, or partition-by, or indeed lots of other sequential functions. These days the implementation is much shorter, but it's less obvious what's going on if you're not familiar with the more general function I called glue:
(defn partition-between [split? coll]
(glue conj []
(fn [v x]
(not (split? [(peek v) x])))
(constantly false)
coll))
Note that both of these solutions are lazy, which at the time I'm writing this is not true of any of the other solutions in this thread.
Here is one way, with steps split up. It can be narrowed down to fewer statements.
(def l [1 4 5 8 9 10 15 20 21])
(defn reduce_fn [f x y]
(cond
(f (last (last x)) y) (conj x [y])
:else (conj (vec (butlast x)) (conj (last x) y)) )
)
(def reduce_fn1 (partial reduce_fn #(> (- %2 %1) 2)))
(reduce reduce_fn1 [[(first l)]] (rest l))
keep-indexed is a wonderful function. Given a function f and a vector lst,
(keep-indexed (fn [idx it] (if (apply f it) idx))
(partition 2 1 lst)))
(0 2 5 6)
this returns the indices after which you want to split. Let's increment them and tack a 0 at the front:
(cons 0 (map inc (.....)))
(0 1 3 6 7)
Partition these to get ranges:
(partition 2 1 nil (....))
((0 1) (1 3) (3 6) (6 7) (7))
Now use these to generate subvecs:
(map (partial apply subvec lst) ....)
([1] [4 5] [8 9 10] [15] [20 21])
Putting it all together:
(defn gather
[f lst]
(let [indices (cons 0 (map inc
(keep-indexed (fn [idx it]
(if (apply f it) idx))
(partition 2 1 lst))))]
(map (partial apply subvec (vec lst))
(partition 2 1 nil indices))))
(gather #(> (- %2 %) 2) '(1 4 5 8 9 10 15 20 21))
([1] [4 5] [8 9 10] [15] [20 21])
Let's say we have a list of integers: 1, 2, 5, 13, 6, 5, 7 and I want to find the first number that repeats and return a vector of the two indices. In my sample, it's 5 at [2, 5]. What I did so far is loop, but can I do it more elegant, short way?
(defn get-cycle
[xs]
(loop [[x & xs_rest] xs, indices {}, i 0]
(if (nil? x)
[0 i] ; Sequence is over before we found a duplicate.
(if-let [x_index (indices x)]
[x_index i]
(recur xs_rest (assoc indices x i) (inc i))))))
No need to return number itself, because I can get it by index and, second, it may be not always there.
An option using list processing, but not significantly more concise:
(defn get-cycle [xs]
(first (filter #(number? (first %))
(reductions
(fn [[m i] x] (if-let [xat (m x)] [xat i] [(assoc m x i) (inc i)]))
[(hash-map) 0] xs))))
Here is a version using reduced to stop consuming the sequence when you find the first duplicate:
(defn first-duplicate [coll]
(reduce (fn [acc [idx x]]
(if-let [v (get acc x)]
(reduced (conj v idx))
(assoc acc x [idx])))
{} (map-indexed #(vector % %2) coll)))
I know that you have only asked for the first. Here is a fully lazy implementation with little per-step allocation overhead
(defn dups
[coll]
(letfn [(loop-fn [idx [elem & rest] cached]
(if elem
(if-let [last-idx (cached elem)]
(cons [last-idx idx]
(lazy-seq (loop-fn (inc idx) rest (dissoc cached elem))))
(lazy-seq (loop-fn (inc idx) rest (assoc cached elem idx))))))]
(loop-fn 0 coll {})))
(first (dups v))
=> [2 5]
Edit: Here are some criterium benchmarks:
The answer that got accepted: 7.819269 µs
This answer (first (dups [12 5 13 6 5 7])): 6.176290 µs
Beschastnys: 5.841101 µs
first-duplicate: 5.025445 µs
Actually, loop is a pretty good choice unless you want to find all duplicates. Things like reduce will cause the full scan of an input sequence even when it's not necessary.
Here is my version of get-cycle:
(defn get-cycle [coll]
(loop [i 0 seen {} coll coll]
(when-let [[x & xs] (seq coll)]
(if-let [j (seen x)]
[j i]
(recur (inc i) (assoc seen x i) xs)))))
The only difference from your get-cycle is that my version returns nil when there is no duplicates.
The intent of your code seems different from your description in the comments so I'm not totally confident I understand. That said, loop/recur is definitely a valid way to approach the problem.
Here's what I came up with:
(defn get-cycle [xs]
(loop [xs xs index 0]
(when-let [[x & more] (seq xs)]
(when-let [[y] (seq more)]
(if (= x y)
{x [index (inc index)]}
(recur more (inc index)))))))
This will return a map of the repeated item to a vector of the two indices the item was found at.
(get-cycle [1 1 2 1 2 4 2 1 4 5 6 7])
;=> {1 [0 1]}
(get-cycle [1 2 1 2 4 2 1 4 5 6 7 7])
;=> {7 [10 11]}
(get-cycle [1 2 1 2 4 2 1 4 5 6 7 8])
;=> nil
Here's an alternative solution using sequence functions. I like this way better but whether it's shorter or more elegant is probably subjective.
(defn pairwise [coll]
(map vector coll (rest coll)))
(defn find-first [pred xs]
(first (filter pred xs)))
(defn get-cycle [xs]
(find-first #(apply = (val (first %)))
(map-indexed hash-map (pairwise xs))))
Edited based on clarification from #demi
Ah, got it. Is this what you have in mind?
(defn get-cycle [xs]
(loop [xs (map-indexed vector xs)]
(when-let [[[i n] & more] (seq xs)]
(if-let [[j _] (find-first #(= n (second %)) more)]
{n [i j]}
(recur more)))))
I re-used find-first from my earlier sequence-based solution.
I need to take some amount of elements from a sequence based on some quantity rule. Here is a solution I came up with:
(defn take-while-not-enough
[p len xs]
(loop [ac 0
r []
s xs]
(if (empty? s)
r
(let [new-ac (p ac (first s))]
(if (>= new-ac len)
r
(recur new-ac (conj r (first s)) (rest s)))))))
(take-while-not-enough + 10 [2 5 7 8 2 1]) ; [2 5]
(take-while-not-enough #(+ %1 (%2 1)) 7 [[2 5] [7 8] [2 1]]) ; [[2 5]]
Is there any better way to achieve the same?
Thanks.
UPDATE:
Somebody posted that solution, but then removed it. It does the same is the answer that I accepted, but is more readable. Thank you, anonymous well-wisher!
(defn take-while-not-enough [reducer-fn limit data]
(->> (reductions reducer-fn 0 data) ; 1. the sequence of accumulated values
(map vector data) ; 2. paired with the original sequence
(take-while #(< (second %) limit)) ; 3. until a certain accumulated value
(map first))) ; 4. then extract the original values
My first thought is to view this problem as a variation on reduce and thus to break the problem into two steps:
count the number of items in the result
take that many from the input
I also took some liberties with the argument names:
user> (defn take-while-not-enough [reducer-fn limit data]
(take (dec (count (take-while #(< % limit) (reductions reducer-fn 0 data))))
data))
#'user/take-while-not-enough
user> (take-while-not-enough #(+ %1 (%2 1)) 7 [[2 5] [7 8] [2 1]])
([2 5])
user> (take-while-not-enough + 10 [2 5 7 8 2 1])
(2 5)
This returns a sequence and your examples return a vector, if this is important then you can add a call to vec
Something that would traverse the input sequence only once:
(defn take-while-not-enough [r v data]
(->> (rest (reductions (fn [s i] [(r (s 0) i) i]) [0 []] data))
(take-while (comp #(< % v) first))
(map second)))
Well, if you want to use flatland/useful, this is a kinda-okay way to use glue:
(defn take-while-not-enough [p len xs]
(first (glue conj []
(constantly true)
#(>= (reduce p 0 %) len)
xs)))
But it's rebuilding the accumulator for the entire "processed so far" chunk every time it decides whether to grow the chunk more, so it's O(n^2), which will be unacceptable for larger inputs.
The most obvious improvement to your implementation is to make it lazy instead of tail-recursive:
(defn take-while-not-enough [p len xs]
((fn step [acc coll]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [xs (seq coll)]
(let [x (first xs)
acc (p acc x)]
(when-not (>= acc len)
(cons x (step acc xs)))))))
0 xs))
Sometimes lazy-seq is straight-forward and self-explaining.
(defn take-while-not-enough
([f limit coll] (take-while-not-enough f limit (f) coll))
([f limit acc coll]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [s (seq coll)]
(let [fst (first s)
nacc (f acc fst)]
(when (< nxt-sd limit)
(cons fst (take-while-not-enough f limit nacc (rest s)))))))))
Note: f is expected to follow the rules of reduce.